Part of the Atheist Demographics Series
Nine Conclusions Regarding European Immigration-Policy
1. No immigration policy, in whatever shape or form, is able to solve the key problem of our demographic development.
2. Whoever believes that problems of integration can be solved through more education alone
will compel us live a lie.
3. Immigrants are not simply immigrants. Immigrants from Eastern Europe, India, China, and Vietnam pose no integrational problems at all in their second generation.
4. All the important economic and cultural problems of integration in europe are concentrated around immigrants from Muslim countries. The successful integration of Muslim immigrants already living among us has to be given absolute priority over further immigration from Muslim countries.
5. Muslim immigrants have a troubling tendency to form parallel societies and are not able to intermarry with their new countrymen
6. It is the Islamic culture which is responsible for these problems, not the ethnic background. This culture is only marginally compatible with secular Western society.
7. The problems in economic and cultural integration of immigrants from Islamic countries mean that they have an unquestionably negative impact on the host society.
8. The European welfare-state model is not free of blame. Basic social security benefits far exceed the income they could obtain in their home country
9. Immigrants who (a) reject our culture, (b) have no education, and (c) are mostly attracted by the social benefits, and the prospect of bringing in large numbers of family relatives will cost our society more than they pay into it. With high barriers for the unskilled, and no social benefits for immigrants, around 90 percent of Muslim immigrants would never have come here.
I invite everyone to seek out inconsistencies of logical or empirical nature in my analysis .
However I do not expect this to be an easy task.
And should be done only to question my conclusions.
obviously different conclusions can be drawn on this subject.
But anyone in agreement with the analysis and the conclusions, will not object
to the practical suggestions I make.
It does not make sense to argue about the practical suggestions
before agreement is achieved with regard to analysis and conclusions
If we were to conduct political debates by first settling matters with regard to analysis and conclusions, and there after proceed to the discussion of practical policy suggestions
the, 80 percent of all political debate would be uncalled for,
and the remaining 20 percent so much more fertile
But by and large this order of progression is inverted in the political arena.
also in regard to the topics I adress. in my book
The chapters on integration and immigration, are bound to cause a more intense debate.
And that is all good, but this should not lead to an overly narrow view of things.
I have therefore summarised my main points as follows:
1. No Immigration-policy, in whatever shape or form, is able to solve the key problem of our demographic development. Namely, that each generation is around one third smaller than the one that came before. And that within this declining number of children, the relative number of children stemming from uneducated households is constantly on the increase.
2.Education is very important. But education is quickly becoming a new fetish of our society,
and whoever believes that these problems can be solved through more education alone,
is bound to making us live a lie.
3: Immigrants are not simply immigrants.
Immigrants from Eastern Europe India China and Vietnam pose no integrational problems at all
in their second generation.
By that time, these immigrants have a higher level of education and a better employment rate
than do indiginous Germans.
10-11 million immigrants in Germany, and their descendants have no integrational problems in their second generation. They constitute an economical and cultural benefit to Germany.
4th: All important economic and cultural problems of integration are concentrated around the 4-6 million immigrants from Muslim countries. The succesful integration of muslim immigrants already
living among us, has to have absolute priority over further immigration from muslim countries. When it comes to these immigrants education and employment in the 2. and 3. generation is far below that of Germans, other immigrant groups and their descendants.
And nothing seems to support the case for any sufficient improvements over time on this matter
5th: A troubling tendency to form parallel societies is evident.
Only 3 percent of the second generation of turkish immigrants marry a German citizen,
whereas 70 percent of russian immigrants intermarry.
6th: As far as I can tell, these problems are not caused by their ethnic back-ground
It is the Islamic culture which is responsible for the problems.
This culture shapes the values and life-style of a large part of the muslim immigrants,
and is only marginally compatible with secular western society.
This is particularly evident in Great Britian, with the very dissimilar integration of immigrants from India on the one hand and Pakistan and Bangladesh on the other.
These problems burdens not just Germany, but all the European countries with a significant number of muslim immigrants.
7th: The problems of economic and cultural integration of immigrants from islamic countries means that the economic and societal impact of immigration from these countries is unquestionably negative to the host society.
As long as the cultural make-up of these immigrants does not undergo a fundamental change, they will create addtional economic and social problems, not ease the demographic shifts
8th: The German and European wellfare-state model is not free of blame. The basic social security benefits for an immigrant family in Germany far exceed any realistic appraisal of the income they could obtain in say eastern Turkey or Libanon without any family member being employd. The vastly improved integration of the same immigrant groups in the US, is mainly due to the fact that they there either provide for themselves, leave the country or not arrive in the first place
9th: the economic growth in later months and the increased demand for work, has lead to a short-sighted debate about immigration policy. Is it not ironic? For the past 45 years our self-imposed demographic pithole draws closer. With the precision of a clock-work, and the pace and weight of an iceberg. And now, that this pithole shows itself in the labor market, everybody seems frantically astonished.
The highest birthrate in germany, was achieved in 1965. That generation is now 45 years old. They are at the peak of their career and productivity and is now entering the socalled „decling years“. Who are to assume their duties?
1,45 million 45-year olds in Germany currently, but only 950.000 20-year olds and 600.000 one-year olds
hectic does not lead anywhere, reflection is demanded, and learning from our own mistakes.
Immigrants who rejects our culture; has no education; are mostly attracted by the social benefits and the prospect of bringing in large numbers of family relatives... They will in the long run cost our society more than they pay into it.
Many people now want to implement a point-based system or use the american green-card model for immigrants. I am in favor hereof. If Germany had had a system resembling that of Australia New Zealand, Canada or the US. With high barriers for the unskilled, and no social benefits for immigrants then around 90 percent of the Muslim immigrants now living in germany would never have come here. I would like to stress this point